A statistical rationalisation of Hartley's normalised eight-point algorithm

The eight-point algorithm of Hartley occupies an important place in computer vision, notably as a means of providing an initial value of the fundamental matrix for use in iterative estimation methods. In this paper, a novel explanation is given for the improvement in performance of the eight-point algorithm that results from using normalised data. A first step is singling out a cost function that the normalised algorithm acts to minimise. The cost function is then shown to be statistically better founded than the cost function associated with the non-normalised algorithm. This augments the original argument that improved performance is due to the better conditioning of a pivotal matrix. Experimental results are given that support the adopted approach. This work continues a wider effort to place a variety of estimation techniques within a coherent framework.

[1]  Andrew Fitzgibbon,et al.  Invariant Fitting of Two View Geometry Or In Defiance of the 8 Point Algorithm , 2002 .

[2]  H. C. Longuet-Higgins,et al.  A computer algorithm for reconstructing a scene from two projections , 1981, Nature.

[3]  Wojciech Chojnacki,et al.  On the Fitting of Surfaces to Data with Covariances , 2000, IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell..

[4]  Wojciech Chojnacki,et al.  A new approach to constrained parameter estimation applicable to some computer vision problems , 2002 .

[5]  Andrew W. Fitzgibbon,et al.  Invariant fitting of two view geometry , 2004, IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence.

[6]  Peter Meer,et al.  Heteroscedastic Regression in Computer Vision: Problems with Bilinear Constraint , 2000, International Journal of Computer Vision.

[7]  Wojciech Chojnacki,et al.  Rationalising the Renormalisation Method of Kanatani , 2001, Journal of Mathematical Imaging and Vision.

[8]  O. Faugeras,et al.  The Geometry of Multiple Images , 1999 .

[9]  Wojciech Chojnacki,et al.  FNS and HEIV: relating two vision parameter estimation frameworks , 2003, 12th International Conference on Image Analysis and Processing, 2003.Proceedings..

[10]  Rudolf Mester,et al.  The Role of Total Least Squares in Motion Analysis , 1998, ECCV.

[11]  Richard I. Hartley,et al.  In Defense of the Eight-Point Algorithm , 1997, IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell..

[12]  Richard I. Hartley,et al.  Estimation of Relative Camera Positions for Uncalibrated Cameras , 1992, ECCV.

[13]  Bernhard P. Wrobel,et al.  Multiple View Geometry in Computer Vision , 2001 .

[14]  Olivier D. Faugeras,et al.  What can be seen in three dimensions with an uncalibrated stereo rig , 1992, ECCV.

[15]  Zhengyou Zhang,et al.  On the Optimization Criteria Used in Two-View Motion Analysis , 1998, IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell..

[16]  金谷 健一 Statistical optimization for geometric computation : theory and practice , 2005 .

[17]  Philip H. S. Torr,et al.  Outlier detection and motion segmentation , 1993, Other Conferences.